Back

Nutrient Composition of Foods Represented in the U.S. Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies, 2013-2023

Moussa, O. I.; Abouelmagd, M. E.; Hamed, B. M.; Alnajjar, A. Z. Z.; Shata, A.

2026-06-22 nutrition
10.64898/2026.06.17.26355853 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: The U.S. Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS) is updated across NHANES dietary cycles and is central to U.S. nutrition surveillance. However, multi-cycle food-code-level changes in nutrient composition have not been comprehensively characterized across the full WWEIA nutrient panel. Objective: To characterize ten-year temporal patterns in nutrient composition across five FNDDS cycles, evaluate pandemic-period food-code compositional stability, and distinguish exploratory mean-level signals from distributional heterogeneity that may reflect reformulation, database coverage, or food-code definition changes. Methods: We analyzed five consecutive FNDDS biennial releases: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2017-18, 2019-20, and 2021-23. Nutrient values were extracted from the public FNDDS/FoodData Central release files and standardized to per-100-g food-code-level records. Cycle midpoints, 2013.5, 2015.5, 2017.5, 2019.5, and 2022.0, served as the independent variable in an exploratory ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. Mann-Kendall testing assessed monotonic rank trends, Welch's ANOVA assessed food-code-level distributional heterogeneity, and pairwise Welch comparisons with Cohen's d summarized pre-pandemic, pandemic-period, and post-pandemic differences. Equivalence testing using TOST with +/-10% bounds was restricted to the 2019-20 versus 2021-23 stability comparison. OLS sensitivity analyses were repeated after excluding the structurally atypical 2017-18 cycle. Results: Sixty-three nutrients were analyzed. Eight nutrients showed nominal OLS trends, p < 0.05, but none remained significant after Bonferroni correction. Mann-Kendall testing identified two nominal monotonic signals, and none after adjustment. Welch's ANOVA detected cycle-level distributional differences for 61 of 63 nutrients at nominal p < 0.05 and 57 of 63 after adjustment. Pairwise pandemic-period analyses showed many adjusted differences when the pre-pandemic baseline was compared with 2019-20 or 2021-23, but standardized effects were small, with all absolute Cohen's d values < 0.20. No nutrient differed after adjustment between 2019-20 and 2021-23, and 39 of 48 primary analytes met +/-10% TOST equivalence criteria for that comparison. Slope estimates were directionally stable after excluding 2017-18, but nominal significance status remained sensitive to the short time series. Conclusions: FNDDS food composition varied across cycles, but there was no clear decade-long linear trend for most nutrients. The main signal was a possible increase in total PUFA and linoleic acid, which may reflect changes in fat quality. The 2021-23 cycle was very similar to 2019-20, suggesting no major post-pandemic shift in the foods represented. These findings should be interpreted as food-database signals, not as direct estimates of what people consumed.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Current Developments in Nutrition
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.4%
2
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.9%
3
Food & Function
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.6%
4
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 22%
7.8%
5
The Journal of Nutrition
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.8%
6
Public Health Nutrition
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
Frontiers in Nutrition
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
8
Nutrients
67 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.4%
9
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
10
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
11
Appetite
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
12
Science of The Total Environment
186 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 45%
1.7%
14
Food Research International
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
15
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.5%
16
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 22%
1.5%
17
Environment International
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
18
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 26%
1.1%
19
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
20
Blood Advances
62 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
21
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
22
Wellcome Open Research
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
23
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%